Sam Harris weighs in on Historicity of Jesus

He talks about textual errors and the books of the Bible that were once heretical but were eventually canonized. He also compares Jesus to a modern guru who has done everything that Jesus did. If we don't believe this guru, why believe Jesus?

There are a few problems with what he said. The "thousands of discrepancies mostly consist of punctuation errors or statements like "Christ Jesus" Instead of "Jesus Christ". \ As for the miracle stories, Jesus' enemies acknowledged that he did miracles

There is a lecture given by Ehrman on the textual problems. He says that there are 200,000 discrepancies, with 30,000 of them being important. One of them he talks about is a conversation with Nicodemus listed in John 3:1-21. The problem with the passage is it's all about being born again. In Aramaic the conversation would never have happened because there wouldn't have been a double entendre problem. So the entire chapter has a foundational problem. The lecture is long but it's entertaining and certainly he isn't worried about punctuation. Did you know that after Mark 16:9, Mark is written a different author. In the original copy that most call extant from about 200 CE it ends before Jesus reappears. It's simply to women walking away from the cave. It's all text that cannot be verified and out of the hundreds of copies that were made, none survived and shortly thereafter we find them being written by a different author? These are not small problems and typical of why textual critics often don't seem quite as in love with the notion of a mystical god and simply stick to the history.